The flawed push for a third language, Pg 9

Data Challenges the Three-Language Formula

• NEP 2020 mandates a third language in schools without clear evidence of learning benefits.
• Surveys like PISA (2009, 2018), ASER (2018, 2016), NAS (2021) show poor reading & comprehension even in first and second languages.
• E.g., 55% of Class 5 students couldn’t read Class 2-level text in regional language; only 42% had grammar accuracy.

Hindi Dominance & Regional Inequality

• 43.6% of Indians speak Hindi; many Hindi “dialects” treated as separate languages.
• NEP’s third language imposition may burden non-Hindi speakers disproportionately.

Cognitive & Learning Impact

• Third language increases cognitive load; risks fatigue, reduced learning efficiency.
• Non-facilitative transfer from different language families (e.g., Tamil vs. Sanskrit) worsens language acquisition.

Cost & Implementation Barriers

• Teaching three languages in public schools is not cost-effective, especially with limited teachers and resources.
• Better model: Flexible bilingualism, allowing regional adaptation based on student needs.

Analysis & Way Forward

• NEP’s language policy needs flexibility, evidence-backing, and student-centricity.
• Avoid one-size-fits-all ideology; focus on effective foundational literacy first.

Mains Mock Question:

"Critically evaluate the three-language formula proposed in NEP 2020. Should language education policy be driven by pedagogy or politics?"